I kind of like how people automatically assume the United States would gain an instant victory in twenty-four hours, considering they couldn't win over farmers with Kalishnekov's and RPG's in about ten years, on three separate occasions.
Just calling it as I see it, folks; the U.S. Military is actually pretty bad. Technologically advanced, yes, but pretty bad. The only way the United States may win is if China does not enter the conflict, and I may assume that, perhaps, there is a secretive understanding between North Korea and China. China perceives the United States as a falling Great Power, and wants to take its place on the throne of the head Great Power (the super-power). After all, the United States is in debt, struggling to stay afloat, and has failed in ventures all over the globe. I can't blame them, especially considering the state of the United States' "allies" at the moment. Sure, the United States is China's "#1 Trade-Partner", but it can easily find new ones until the United States is done nursing its bruises from a war. In fact, I couldn't see how the United States would be able to survive without resuming direct trade with China after the war.
But those are just my observations as a history-major; take it on your own heed, as will the men in Beijing, Seoul, Pyongyang, and Washington.
You are aware that before Desert Storm Iraq had the third largest standing army in the world, and we were able to beat them in less than 100 hours right?
You are confusing guerrilla groups with a standing army, guerrilla gropes use hit and run tactics while an actual military force has to stand and fight.
Take Vietnam for example, the NVA (North Vietnam Army) was a total joke, they were slaughtered every time they fought U.S. and NATO forces, the real threat was the Viet Cong, because they would pop up out of the Jungle fire a few rounds and run away, and every time they stood and fought us they were slaughter, you can ask any Vietnam vet who was involved in the Tet Offensive and they will tell you that it was a tactical failure for the VC who lost almost all of their men in the attack, while U.S. and NATO forces lost very few.
What prolonged the War so much was that the Johnson Administration insisted that we fallow UN guidelines, every time we got the NVA and the VC on the ropes, the North Vietnamese would agree to peace talks and use this time to resupply their forces and once they were properly supplied they would break off the peace talks and resume fighting, they did this because the Johnson Administration wouldn't allow are forces to attack, but once Nixon took office he stopped that and due to the way Nixon ran the war North Vietnam actually sent a message to one of out carriers asking what the terms of surrender were, the only problem was that about an hour before that the peace treaty was signed in Paris.
And as for the War of Terror, the problem is again the way were are fighting, while this may not be politically correct, what we should've done is do the same thing we did with the American Indians and the Japanese, we should've made it clear to the Arabs that if they wanted to continue to exist as a race they needed to throw down their arms and give up the ones who won't.
I am a history buff myself, as well as a military buff, and have read countless articles in books and online and watch the History channel almost religiously, as well as talking to people who in Vietnam and with my dad who also a history buff and talked with people who were in WWII, Korea and Vietnam.